It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
Please don't let people in the air that do not know what they are doing!
Originally posted by postings
Suppose it was set up so that you couldn't drive it, and it had it's own guidance system?
-P
Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
Please don't let people in the air that do not know what they are doing!
Originally posted by ShadowXIX
Even the Moller Skycar was designed to be much simpler to operate then any plane,That was his goal atleast.
Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
If they make them to go from point A to point B without human intervention, and the hard drive on the inboard computer fails the human behind the yoke better know all of these things or it may come down, hard, on a school - church - hospital - (insert building here)
Originally posted by nonpoint
Now, I wonder what altitude would be suitable for the cars to fly? To me it seems there should be many different heights: city, town, country etc. Now say that the country altitude for flight was relatively low, say 10 or 15 feet, wouldn't this eleminate some problems. Say...Birds, freezing temps, very deadly crashes. Even if the altitude was somewhat higher, 25-40 ft., wouldnt that still be alright.
A computer can configure gauges alot faster than a human being ever thought about computing data .... ANYONE WHO DISAGREES with that is in FACT in more of a surprise than I could ever convey to you ...
Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
I do think self-guidance systems are a LONG way off.
A very well funded aircraft company had one fly right into trees killing 3 people.
www.airdisaster.com...
I fly a Piper Saratoga with an auto pilot slaved with a GPS, it is top of the line and still has a long long long long way to go before it can fly itself.
Thanks
- One Man Short ®
Originally posted by One Man Short of Manhood
But the problem with this is, it still has to have wings - engine - propeller (jet engine) and still must generate lift - fight stall - fight ice - battle birds - understand aerodynamics - weight balance - - - I could go on.
My point is that flight is still flight no matter how simple you try to make, and no mater how much computers try to do it for you.
If they make them to go from point A to point B without human intervention, and the hard drive on the inboard computer fails the human behind the yoke better know all of these things or it may come down, hard, on a school - church - hospital - (insert building here)
How many average joes will be willing to take flight lessons for 3 months to 2 years at $80 - 300 hours to fly a car when they could just drive. I don't think there will be enough people to make it economically fesible.
And I do think the government should make everyone who would own one take flight lesson just in case the worst case scenario happens, because sometime, somwhere it will.
Just my opinion.
- One Man Short ®
Originally posted by ufochaser
I think that when most people think flying cars, they are thinking of the opening scenes of Back to the Future 2, where people get their cars hoverconverted and have a skyway and a half. When I first watched that scene, I thought that would be SOOOO cool!!! But then I grew up and realized that if you run out of gas, you can't just pull over. If you break down, you break DOWN!!!
Originally posted by Frosty
It'll never happen. What is in the air that I need a car to obtain? We have planes to take us across large distances and haul other parload, these I think would be much more effecient than a personal flying car.
originally posted by nonpoint
When will flying cars take over?